This was not just an appearance on a late night talk show. This was a Ron Paul campaign rally.

During the final interview segment with Paul, Leno asked him his thoughts on the other candidates and went down the list by name. When he got to Bachmann, Ron Paul replied, “She doesn’t like Muslims. She hates Muslims. She wants to go get them.” This probably didn’t win him any neo-conservative supporters. Then he doubled down on this when he replied similarly about Santorum saying he doesn’t like “gay people and Muslims.”  Wow. I can’t imagine that Santorum and Bachmann won’t issue a counter-attack soon.

This just further cements my point in previous articles. Ron Paul can and would beat Obama in the general election. His more difficult win is in the GOP primary.

During the appearance Twitter was about 99% positive about Ron Paul, including many tweets saying things like, “I wasn’t sure before, but now I’m definitely voting for Ron Paul.”

Now we can sit back and monitor how the pundits and other candidates react, if they react at all.

See the entire appearance below in 4 parts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sj0r0lRyiKY

Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4

Please send a letter to Congress asking them to stop impeding the oil spill clean up, and to do less in general so they can focus more on trying to do a few things right.

You can copy or borrow from my sample letter to Congress . . .

You politicians constantly tell us that your regulations are needed to protect the environment. But it looks like your regulations are actually harming the environment, by strangling efforts to clean the BP oil spill.

Read this story: http://abcnews.go.com/WN/bp-oil-spill-gov-bobby-jindals-wishes-crude/story?id=10946379

The Obama administration forced Lousiana to stop using 16 barges that were sucking up oily water.

And then this story: http://www.examiner.com/x-7812-DC-SCOTUS-Examiner~y2010m6d14-Obama-blocked-cleanup-of-BP-oil-spill-by-Americas-allies-Failed-to-issue-needed-Jones-Act-waiver

A stupid set of laws, called the Jones Acts, have blocked foreign crews from helping to clean the oil spill.

I think you guys need to start regulating less, and doing less in general. BP is paying a huge price for its incompetence, and deservedly so, but you guys constantly get a free ride. You aren’t responsible for anything!

* You’re a monopoly
* Everything you do is based on force
* It’s almost impossible to fire any of you
* And you constantly use your own failings as an excuse to grab more power

The good news is, the American people are witnessing your failures. And like me, they’re letting you know. Your own political survival might depend on more than pleasing rhetoric or promises. You should actually reduce the REAL NUMBER of regulations we have, starting with the Jones Act.

END LETTER

You can send your own letter to Congress using DownsizeDC.org’s Educate the Powerful System.

And we encourage you to spread the word. Please Digg this message on our blog.

Jim Babka
President
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h

Official email newsletter of DownsizeDC.org, Inc. & Downsize DC Foundation.

According to Washington historian Doug Brinkley, in an interview with Anderson Cooper, there are plans to force BP to pay for the redirection of the Mississippi River as part of a large Gulf Recovery Act.  See the interview here:

Who knows if there is any validity to it, but it wouldn’t surprise me if they attempt it. The Obama administration is likely to do whatever it takes to appear “on top” of the situation.

The politicians meddle with everything. For example, when it comes to energy production there are . . .

* Direct subsidies
* Tax breaks and tax penalties
* Liability limits, but also potential fines if you don’t do things just right

What a meddling muddle! This is why . . .

It’s fair to say that the federal government played a hidden role in the BP oil spill. To learn more read the sample letter to Congress below.

We think it would be better . . .

* For oil companies to pay all the costs and carry all the potential risks of each drilling project
* To have all of these costs and risks reflected in the prices consumers pay, rather than hidden in legislation and regulations

In other words, there should be . . .

* No subsidies or special tax breaks
* No liability limits
* No tax-funded bailouts, or government run clean-up funds
* And regulations should be provided by insurance companies who are putting their own money at risk

If, after reading the sample letter to Congress below, you agree with us that this approach would better protect both the environment and the taxpayer, then please send Congress a letter telling them that. You can use DownsizeDC.org’s No Bailouts campaign to send your letter.

You may borrow from or copy this sample letter . . .

The BP oil spill is another example of the destructive nature of government guarantees and bailouts.

I know that BP has agreed to pay more of the clean-up costs, beyond the government-provided liability cap. I also know that they’ve been threatened by Congress and the Administration if they don’t. But this is hypocritical, because Congress created the liability cap and the clean up fund in the first place! In 1990, Congress passed a law that . . .

* capped oil company liability for spills at $75 million
* set up a fund, paid for by the oil companies, to pay for the rest of the clean-up

In effect, this is a government-run oil spill insurance program, but without the risk management incentives provided by real insurance companies. This whole scheme was a terrible idea from the start, and has been used to bail out companies that cause oil spills a whopping 51 times! http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/us/02liability.html

Because of the liability cap, BP may have been less cautious than it would have been if its own money had been at risk.

In addition, a lack of regulation has been blamed for the BP spill. But government regulators . . .

* don’t have the profit and loss incentive that private insurance companies do; they don’t go out of business for their mistakes
* tend to impose one-size-fits all rules that don’t work as well as the site-specific requirements that insurance companies impose
* and often act as partners in the industry they regulate, not as watchdogs http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/tgif/bp-spill/

But imagine if we had a free market in energy . . .

* Oil companies would be liable for ALL the damage they cause
* And this would compel them to seek liability insurance in the private market

In turn, insurance companies would . . .

* demand the strictest standards to prevent accidents and spills because, unlike government regulators, they would be financially responsible for any mishaps
* and, if the risks are too great, they would deny coverage

If off-shore drilling is too risky, that means no one in a free market will invest in it, and entrepreneurs would then have a huge incentive to develop less-risky energy alternatives. This would be a good thing! This is what you politicians claim to want!

This means that a true free market in energy would actually reduce accidents and CREATE A CLEANER ENVIRONMENT.

I therefore demand that you put an end to government meddling in energy production.

1) Instead of raising the liability cap for oil spills, remove all government liability caps on all forms of energy production
2) Instead of inefficient and counter-productive government regulations, allow private insurance to set requirements for off-shore oil drilling and other forms of energy production, such as nuclear, which is also currently protected by government liability limits
3) Get rid of all subsidies, tax breaks, and tax penalties so that we can benefit from free and fair competition among all energy producers

Once these three market-based policies are in place, energy companies will bear the true capital expense of their projects — instead of the taxpayers. Risky and dangerous projects will flop. But profitable projects should be allowed to proceed — including drilling for oil.

END LETTER

You may send your letter using DownsizeDC.org’s Educate the Powerful System.

And help spread the word! Forward this to friends and share it on Facebook.

Thanks for helping to Downsize DC!

Jim Babka
President
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h

Official email newsletter of DownsizeDC.org, Inc. & Downsize DC Foundation.

With these regulations, the Obama Administration will bypass Congress entirely and implement their climate change agenda. The administration knows what is good for us. Why mess with Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution? Why worry about giving the people represenation?

DownsizeDC.org’s Write the Laws Act (WTLA) would prevent this bureaucratic “legislation without representation” and we encourage you to send a letter to Congress demanding that they pass the WTLA.

These regulations will be very harmful, as I explained in my letter to Congress . . .

The EPA’s proposal to regulate greenhouse gases is a prime example of the need for WTLA. The EPA’s “authority” comes from the Clean Air Act, though that bill was never intended to be used this way. As Steven E. Hayward of the American Enterprise Institute writes . . .
http://www.aei.org/article/101456

* Reducing conventional sources of air pollution in the Clean Air Act was mostly a technological problem–such as removing lead from gasoline.
* The intent and effect of the Clean Air Act was cleaner air, not reduced energy consumption (which has actually doubled)
* But the only way to reduce CO2 emissions is to burn a lot less fossil fuel because there are no add-on technologies to remove carbon dioxide from fossil fuel combustion
* Which means the EPA will turn into an energy regulatory agency

It gets worse . . .   

* Because there are so many more sources of CO2 emissions than there are of conventional air pollution, the EPA’s regulatory reach is certain to be much greater.
* The Clean Air Act authorizes the EPA to regulate stationary sources (buildings, factories, power plants, etc.) that generate as little as 250 tons of pollution per year.
* 250 tons is a lot if we are talking about emissions that cause ozone, but it is a tiny amount for carbon dioxide.
* In fact, most small office buildings will meet that threshold, as will most fast-food restaurants and virtually all manufacturing facilities
* If the EPA makes exceptions for these smaller facilities, it will certainly face lawsuits from larger facilities AND environmental groups

And finally,

* CO2, the primary nutrient for plant life, is clearly not a hazard to human health in the same way as is carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, lead, and ozone – the intended targets of the Clear Air Act
* The EPA had to base its findings on CO2′s dangers entirely on indirect or secondary effects, such as the possibility of more deaths from extreme weather events like heat waves or hurricanes. But the EPA’s claims rests on dubious or contested scientific findings.
* Even the EPA’s own employees, Alan Carlin and John Davidson, have argued that that “the EPA and many other agencies and countries have paid too little attention to the science of global warming,” and cite peer-reviewed studies pointing out the deficiencies and anomalies of the conventional climate-catastrophe narrative.

The Clean Air Act is a terrible vehicle for regulating carbon emissions. Please enact legislation to prevent the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases. And, please prevent future bureaucratic law-making by passing the Write the Laws Act.

END LETTER

You can send your letter using DownsizeDC.org’s Educate the Powerful System

And please consider making a donation to further our work.

James Wilson
Assistant Communications Director
DownsizeDC.org

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h
is the official email list of DownsizeDC.org, Inc. & Downsize DC Foundation

It is certainly a sci-fi page turner with a fast moving plot and interesting characters. The novel juxtaposes two societies, a society with very little freedom and another that is about as libertarian as you can get. Byrd accomplishes this effort quite effectively without getting overly preachy. There are no multi-page John Galt style speeches. Byrd uses the plot to emphasize the free vs. non-free “fight” in a quite understated way.

I’m sure there are those that will balk that Byrd’s vision of a future where environmentalists control society in such a way, but that’s not really the point here as I see it. The point really is to illustrate that your individual freedom is being assaulted on all fronts, not just the obvious ones.

Yes, the climate change zealots are dangerous to your freedoms. Are they as dangerous as terrorists? Maybe more dangerous, maybe less, but I would argue that Byrd’s future vision is not too far from our future reality.

We may have slightly cleaner air, but at what cost? Is it worth it to live in a prison-like society to shave a degree or two off the global average?

The book makes a perfect, if not mischievous gift, for your favorite Left-leaning environmentalist friends, if you have any. Of course, fans of Ayn Rand, Robert Heinlein, and L. Neil Smith will find “The Light of Day” a wonderful addition to their libertarian fiction bookshelves.

——————

NOTE: If you use the links in the above article for purchasing books LibertyMaven.com gets a cut.

In November 2009, computer hackers broke into the computer of the Climate Research Unit in England revealing the shady behavior of climate scientists there, some of whom have been literally making up data to support the climate change/global warming hysteria that is gripping the planet these days.

Well, the hackers have done it again.

They have now hacked into the computer network of the Institute for Cold and Hot Study in Burbank, California. Currently circulating around the Internet are the following smoking gun round robin e-mail exchanges between lead scientist Dr. Emmanuel Bogstock and his climate scientist underlings Daniel Dankel of Morbo University, Aspiro Mafioso of the Swedish Weather and Personality Clinic, and Jorge Redenko of Smogstack, L.L.C. in Upper Volta which reveal how sinister the global climate conspiracy really is:

From: d.dankel@morbouniversity.edu To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Climate Change
How do we get the ball rolling on this climate thing? My university underwriters want to see me working harder on this.

From: bogstock@icyhot.gov To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Climate Change
Get that U2 guy, Bono, to write a song about it. Then DiCaprio will bring his Hollywood people in on it. And Gore will string it all together when he talks about it at a conference somewhere. That should get them off your back.

From: d.dankel@morbouniversity.edu To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Bono
Bono’s turning sceptic. His tour bus got stuck in a snow bank in Fargo, South Dakota a few days ago. I hear he’s starting to have his doubts.

From: jorge@smogstack.org To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Bono
He bought the one that solar flares cause heat rash.

From: bogstock@icyhot.gov To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Bono
Tell Bono snow is a by-product of global warming because the earth is trying to compensate for increased temperatures by cooling down. Tell him not to go near Penobscott, Maine if he wants to do a music video there in July. Oh, and tell Gore this climate change will cause chocolate to melt on a worldwide basis.

From: flashman@climagone.net To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Chocolate
Even dark chocolate?

From: bogstock@icyhot.gov To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Chocolate
ESPECIALLY dark chocolate.

From: d.dankel@morbouniversity.edu To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Gore
He’s not going to like that. He loves Godiva.

From: bogstock@icyhot.gov To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Gore
Yeah, well tell him to fill his freezer now. He’s going to be stuck eating stale Twinkies once this hits.

From: jorge@smogstack.org To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Climate Change
Do you think the public might get wise and figure out that ‘climate change’ is just a fancy word for ‘weather’.

From: flashman@climagone.net To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Climate Change
They still haven’t figured out that hummus is people.

From: d.dankel@morbouniversity.edu To: Jorge Redenko Subject: Hummus
Just our little secret.

From: bogstock@icyhot.gov To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Hummus
Right.

From: flashman@climagone.net To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Facebook
Hey, I’ve started the Pepe the Polar Bear site on Facebook. He’s going to describe, day-by-day, how he’s losing his habitat to climate change and how he can’t find any seals to eat anymore. We’ll have some photos of him looking pathetic scrounging through the garbage cans of Nome.

From: bogstock@icyhot.gov To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Facebook
Great! And make sure he’s got plenty of melted chocolate dripping down his muzzle.

From: flashman@climagone.net To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Facebook
Gotcha.

From: jorge@smogstack.org To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: New Data
We’ve just found Viennese weather records dating back to 1702 which show a normal cooling/heating cycle in the earth’s temperatures from then to now.

From: bogstock@icyhot.gov To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: New Data
Destroy the records.

From: jorge@smogstack.org To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: New Data
My shredder’s out.

From: bogstock@icyhot.gov To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: New Data
Well go down to Office Max and get one. What are you waiting for?

From: jorge@smogstack.org To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: New Data
I have to get a purchase voucher. They’re already suspicious over my White-Out purchases. My lab looks like a lake of homogenized milk.

From: bogstock@icyhot.gov To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: New Data
Stop whining and get to work on this. Burn down your lab if you have to. That always works in a pinch.

From: jorge@smogstack.org To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: New Data
That’ll look suspicious.

From: d.dankel@morbouniversity.edu To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: New Data
Jack Tedd’s burned his lab down six times. He blames Exxon whenever they start snooping around.

From: flashman@climagone.net To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: New Data
I used Exxon to blame for the temperature readings I was getting in Florida.

From: d.dankel@morbouniversity.edu To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: New Data
What would we do without Exxon.

From: bogstock@icyhot.gov To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Trees
Since trees are repositories for huge amounts of CO2, what we need is a large government project to send lumber to the sun where it will be destroyed harmlessly away from the planet.

From: flashman@climagone.net To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Trees
Couldn’t we just use the moon?

From: bogstock@icyhot.gov To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Trees
No. The moon would only become heavier and, centuries from now, crash into the earth. The moon-hitting-the-earth crisis will have to be left for a future generation of climate scientists. Right now, we have to focus our energy on saving planet Earth.

From: jorge@smogstack.org To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Unbelievers
A lot of people don’t believe that we’re the cause of global warming.

From: bogstock@icyhot.gov To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Unbelievers
Agree with them to a point. Tell them that global warming began with the extinction of the dinosaurs. Since their rotting carcasses soon turned to oil, which was then processed into gasoline, dinosaurs ushered in the hydrocarbon economy we’re mired in.

From: jorge@smogstack.org To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Dinosaurs
I see. If the dinosaurs hadn’t died out, this would be a peaceful, ecologically-perfect planet.

From: bogstock@icyhot.gov To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Dinosaurs
Exactly. We can compare this to the coelocanth, the oiliest fish in the sea. They’re still around and nobody’s running their SUV on them.

From: d.dankel@morbouniversity.edu To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Bird Problem
I’m trying to write a climate model that shows how CO2 from fireplaces cause localized bird extinctions. But I can’t account for all those pigeons on telephone wires everywhere. Damned pigeons.

From: bogstock@icyhot.gov To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Bird Problem
Add a numeric constant that includes European starlings.

From: flashman@climagone.net To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Bird Problem
Cool. This will allow us to predict crop failures and droughts everywhere, too.

From: d.dankel@morbouniversity.edu To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Bird Problem
But the pigeons…

From: bogstock@icyhot.gov To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Bird Problem
Call them doves.

From: d.dankel@morbouniversity.edu To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Bird Problem
Brilliant.

From: flashman@climagone.net To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Climate Spokeswoman
Do you think we can get Lady Gaga into the Climate Change camp?

From: bogstock@icyhot.gov To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Climate Spokeswoman
She’s never said much about environmental issues. Why do you ask?

From: flashman@climagone.net To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Climate Spokeswoman
I like her music and she’s got dynamite gams.

From: bogstock@icyhot.gov To: E.B., D.D., A.M., J.R. Subject: Climate Spokeswoman
We’ll work on that.

———————–

Editor’s Note: For “satire-challenged” readers, these are not actual emails.

In the first segment they discuss health care:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4c4dCD0ipg

In the second segment, Ben Stein and Tanya Acker join Paul and Frank to discuss health care and Bernanke being named Time Magazine’s “Person of the Year”:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wT4dOdBVsQ

Finally, in the third segment, they discuss the public argument between Sarah Palin and Arnold Schwarzenegger, who they would have selected as person of the year, and Obama’s letter to Kim Jong Il of North Korea:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEdcNLrs6-Y

Rather than comment on the discussion within the videos I’d like to comment on how positive it is that Ron Paul seems to now be a “regular” on Larry King and several other main stream media outlets. It’s nice to have his atypical message being heard by so many people. The ability to wake the drooling masses begins by having a mechanism to reach them. Like it or not, the main stream media is that mechanism.

Please send Congress another letter opposing cap and trade.

You can copy or borrow from my letter to Congress to write your own . . .  

Revelations of anti-scientific behavior at the CRU (Climatic Research Unit) undermines the justification for cap and trade.

The case for human-caused global warming depends on claims made by the UN’s IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), which in turn depend on so-called research by the CRU. But please take note . . .

Emails hacked from the CRU reveal that key advocates of the global warming hypothesis may have knowingly corrupted the scientific process. For example…

CRU researchers may have manipulated temperature histories in order to get the results they wanted. They have systematically refused to expose either their data or their manipulations to testing by the wider scientific community. This kind of testing is a crucial component of the scientific process.

Real scientists wouldn’t behave this way.

CRU researchers have also demonstrated a keen desire to silence critics, as well to devise tactics to rebuff and resist Freedom of Information requests. The scientific process requires peer critiques.

Real scientists wouldn’t behave this way.

The hypothesis that rising atmospheric CO2 should lead to global warming seems plausible. But it’s not an open and shut case, and the scientific process is famous for refuting seemingly plausible ideas. Now the practices of the CRU have set back the global warming hypothesis many years – perhaps to its starting point. The C02 hypothesis needs further, OPEN testing. It can’t be taken for granted because it sounds reasonable, nor because it came from people with titles and degrees.

Your responsibility in this matter seems clear . . .

You must reject the cap and trade bill, and craft no further policy until you have better evidence from which to work.

I will be watching to see if you behave responsibly, and I will be discussing your re-election with fellow voters in light of how you handle to this issue.

END OF SAMPLE LETTER

You can send your letter using DownsizeDC.org’s Educate the Powerful System

And spread this message to your friends: http://www.downsizedc.org/blog/global-warming-and-climate-change-would-you-like-climate-scientists-to-do-science-instead-of-politics

Jim Babka
President
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h
is the official email list of DownsizeDC.org, Inc. & Downsize DC Foundation

But for the sake of argument, let’s assume human-caused global warming is indeed happening. Conceding this, it turns out that . . .

The effort to curb carbon emissions will be far more harmful than global warming itself!

Please send Congress a letter demanding that they defeat the cap & trade bill and oppose any global climate treaty.

Here’s what I wrote in my letter . . .   

Efforts to curb global warming make as much sense as spending $2 to save $1.

The International Energy Agency believes we must cut carbon emissions in half if we want to stop global warming. They also estimate that this will cost $45 trillion.  http://www.iea.org/press/pressdetail.asp?PRESS_REL_ID=263

Yet Dr. William Nordhaus of Yale calculates that the economic losses from global warming, if we do nothing to curb carbon emissions, will reach just $22 trillion this century. Dr. Nordhaus also estimates that proposals made by The Stern Review and Al Gore to curb carbon emissions would cost $17-25 trillion more than doing nothing:  http://nordhaus.econ.yale.edu/dice_mss_072407_all.pdf

And all of this assumes an effort in which the whole world cooperates, with no cheating!

If Congress imposes cap & trade on the U.S., or ratifies a climate treaty, it will not stop global warming. Instead, it will only damage the U.S. economy and drive more jobs overseas. That’s because  . . .

Many developing countries will not agree to participate!

We would be hypocrites to condemn them for this. They only want what we already have. Most importantly, there are sound environmental reasons why we should want them to gain our level of affluence . . .

Wealthy nations like ours do better at protecting the environment!

* Our water is safer and our air is cleaner.
* We can afford to protect species from extinction.
* We can afford research that constantly discovers how to do more with less, allowing us to grow more and more affluent while imposing fewer burdens on the environment.

Environmental protection will benefit from a wealthier world, not suffer from it.

Developing nations will not sacrifice their progress just to please Western politicians, and we shouldn’t want them to do so. If we really care about the environment, then we need these nations to become richer, not poorer.

The proposed schemes for a cap & trade law and a global climate treaty will . . .

* Fail because of cheating or non-participation
* Cost at least $2 for every $1 we gain, and probably far more
* Impoverish America and the world, thereby destroying the innovation and environmental protections that free market affluence makes possible

Do not spend $2 in a vain attempt to save $1. Do not support a scheme that cannot work. Instead, support the economic progress that makes environmental protection possible. Do this by opposing the cap & trade bill, and any global climate treaty. Let free market innovation and affluence pave the way for solutions that will really work.

END LETTER

You can send your letter using DownsizeDC.org’s Educate the Powerful System.

Remember that the more people who read this message, the more likely we will be victorious.

* If you forward this message to others, be sure to clip off the Dispatch footer when you do
* For social bookmarkers and networkers, here’s a tiny url for this message: http://tinyurl.com/y946ls7
* If you’d like to make a monthly pledge or one-time contribution to further our work, you can do so on our secure contribution page.

Let’s Downsize DC!

James Wilson
Assistant Communications Director
DownsizeDC.org

SOURCES

Information that inspired links and points above originated with Global Warming 101: Costs by William Yeatman at GlobalWarming.org.

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h
is the official email list of DownsizeDC.org, Inc. & Downsize DC Foundation

Our own James Wilson has analyzed this issue on our blog.

The good news is that President Obama isn’t going to Copenhagen to sign a treaty, but he may sign a proposal that could lead to a treaty at a later date. The Copenhagen proposal is designed to create an international scheme to control carbon emissions (and the entire world economy in the bargain).

President Obama wants to have the “cap and trade” (cap and tax) bill passed before he goes to Copenhagen.

Our goal should be to send him to Denmark empty-handed.

Cap and trade should be defeated because . . .

• It hasn’t worked in Europe
• It probably isn’t the best way to control carbon emissions, assuming you believe that’s important
• The climate models that supposedly justify cap and trade have been consistently wrong

Cap and trade needs 60 votes to come to the floor in the Senate. If we can stop that from happening now then there’s no way that 67 Senators will come together later to ratify a treaty for the same purpose, especially if that treaty cedes American sovereignty to international organizations.

We must defeat cap and trade. We must send Obama to Denmark empty-handed.

Please send Congress a letter opposing cap and trade.

You can use my letter to Congress as a guide . . .

Please pay attention to the climate change models. They have consistently predicted global warming, and been consistently wrong. We’ve had global cooling over the past eleven years, NOT global warming. Mother Earth disagrees with the climate models, and mother always knows best.

If you haven’t kept up with the science please check out this BBC article: http://tinyurl.com/ygwaaqp

Please also pay attention to the fact that cap and trade hasn’t worked in Europe. Meanwhile . . .

Science and industry are creating all sorts of innovations that will be much more effective than your politically designed regulations. These innovations are happening because consumers want green solutions! I’m especially excited by the recent breakthroughs in “cold fusion” as reported on 60 Minutes: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4955212n

Freedom works! We need more freedom and fewer coercive, top-down government dictates.

I want my two Senators to vote against cap and trade, and I want my Representative to vote against it if it comes to another vote in the House.

END OF SAMPLE LETTER TO CONGRESS

You can send your letter here.

Please take additional steps to spread the word, recruit more DC Downsizers, and increase the heat on Congress:

• Ask other people to send a letter to Congress — forward them this message
• Digg this message on our Blog
• Contribute so we can reach more people

Jim Babka, President
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

Check out these recent posts on our blog:

Will Copenhagen Treaty cede U.S. Sovereignty?
President Obama keeps a promise
Congress responds to Constitutional questions
The latest news about the “Read the Bills” idea

D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h
is the official email list of DownsizeDC.org, Inc. & Downsize DC Foundation